Bush announces radical shift in foreign policy; No U.S. media report it

[cornermouse]

http://www.workingforchange.com/blog/

Sirotablog

In case you thought the Bush administration's dangerous, and national-security-weakening unilateralism was just a one-time deal in Iraq, think again. Buried in the UK's Financial Times - and as far as I can tell, not reported anywhere else - are the details of a State Department briefing this week in which the Bush administration very publicly said it is essentially scrapping U.S. support for NATO and the United Nations. No joke.

Here's the key excerpt:

"The Bush administration says it wants to be able to form 'coalitions of the willing' more efficiently for dealing with future conflicts rather than turning to existing but unreliable institutional alliances such as Nato. 'We ad hoc our way through coalitions of the willing. That's the future,' a senior State Department official said in a briefing this week."

NATO and the U.N. are by no means perfect, and America should continue to reserve its right to defend itself. Nonetheless, this declaration by the administration represents a radical shift in U.S. policy (at least its publicly-stated policy). And one that begs a very simple question: how could anyone - even the Bush administration - look at the Iraq "coalition of the willing" model as anything but an incredible failure? It has left American troops isolated in Iraq, and American taxpayers largely footing the entire bill for reconstruction.

[CJCRANE]

1. Because very few in NATO or UN agree with them nt

[rpgamerd00d]

27. Israel agrees with us 19% of the time, England 15%... and...

... those are our #1 and #2 allies in the UN.

[Cooley Hurd]

2. K&R - although I thought this was already SOP for the Bush Admin...

:kick:

[Peace Patriot]

3. The Bush junta decides who they want to loot next, and then makes up

the policy, and the laws, they need to do it.

I remember when Bush gave the speech at West Point--also virtually ignored by the war profiteering corporate news monopolies--announcing the brand new idea of preemptive, strike-first-ask-questions-later war policy, I think it was in the summer of '02, six months or so before Iraq. Cheney and oil buds had decided to invade Iraq back in spring '01 (prior to 9/11) at the secret energy meetings. They brushed off 9/11, OBL and Afghanistan, except for thinking how to use it for getting Iraq's oil (and for preventing Saddam from trading in euros), and then turned US policy on its head, at West Point, and invented the policy of invading whoever they damned please.

Since the UN and EU are working with Iran on the nuke problem--the junta is now going to scrap the UN and NATO, because they now want Iran's oil, too (and also to prevent Iran from starting to trade in euros in March, as they plan). They also want to get control of Iran's oil contract with China. And they'll slaughter tens of thousands of innocent Iranians to accomplish these goals, just as they did in Iraq.

Out goes 100 years of US policy development, aimed at supporting democracies, preventing rogue states, dictatorships and vile political movements like Nazism from running rampant through the world, and at developing the mechanisms for world peace. Not always successful, and often honored in the breach, but still, it was our stated policy, and the gist of all our treaties, and other countries did trust our word on certain principles, which we went to the trouble to violate mostly covertly, so as to maintain some order, law and decorum in the world.

The junta is just going to chuck all this out. No more decorum. No more effort at order and lawfulness.

It's mind-boggling, really, how collusive the news monopolies are with all this, and most of the Democratic leadership as well. I suppose it shouldn't surprise us, after what they all did with the 2004 election, but still--these earth-shattering, peace-shattering changes, and a big black hole where news, discussion and democracy should be.

Just as with who is going to be president, these things are decided for us, now. We have no say. And I guess they're thinking, why discuss it--especially with the cannon fodder and the slave labor?

[julianer]

28. I think you are deluding yourself

if you think the following is true:

'Out goes 100 years of US policy development, aimed at supporting democracies, preventing rogue states, dictatorships and vile political movements like Nazism from running rampant through the world, and at developing the mechanisms for world peace. Not always successful, and often honored in the breach, but still, it was our stated policy, and the gist of all our treaties, and other countries did trust our word on certain principles, which we went to the trouble to violate mostly covertly, so as to maintain some order, law and decorum in the world.'

Read some Chomsky. Read Harold Pinters Nobel acceptance speech. See the world from the perspective of the ruled.

[izzie]

4. It is hard to believe that about half the voters want this guy

I do hope Congress will get off the kool-aid and start acting like Am. once more and get this power out of his hands. He is really nuts. I frank;y wonder if he knows what is even going on. It is like they give him things to say as they rape the whole country and he gets his office and plane to play in as he keeps telling every one he is speaking from God. Is he coming out of a real good drunk time or what? I really feel off balance with this group.

[converted_democrat]

5. Unreal..The gall these F'ers have is absolutely unreal. n/t

[Oversea Visitor]

6. Dont want to work with the world

Fine
Watch they unload all the US dollars

[bigtree]

7. and they assume they have the power to make it so

they do, without Congress stepping up and taking responsibility for these issues. They enable the Executive with their frightened and tainted appropriations. The Bush administration is just being predictably aggressive in grabbing all the power Congress lets them. All it would take to make the White House a paper bullhorn would be a yank on the purse strings.

[CanOfWhoopAss]

8. Facist lunatic neocons nt

[Golden Raisin]

9. The U.S. media didn't report it?

I'm shocked. Perhaps if NATO or the UN were suddenly & mysteriously found missing from a cruise ship, leaving a trail of blood behind on the poop-deck, or if they had been trapped and then died in a mine explosion they'd have made it onto the "news".

[Harper_is_Bush]

10. This isn't related to the mine story, correct?

Well then, not interested.

[dutchdemocrat]

11. This really pisses me off

When his unreliable 'NATO' allies are dying in Afghanistan chasing the real terrorists.

A Grade Asshole.

[ThomWV]

12. I Did See That On The News

I could not tell you where but two or three days ago I heard it in fleeting mention. I thought I had misunderstood what the commentator had said, but then it was gone and no way to know.

It is quite possible I heard it on Link TV and the news from from either a European or Mid Eastern news source.

[CantGetFooledAgain]

13. Prelude to bombing Iran

The new "Coalition of the Willing": USA and Israel.

[SillyGoose]

15. That's what I'm afraid of...this is a prelude to bombing Iran.

They have been amping up the war drums against Iran lately. This is really bad news.

[bloom]

24. That's what seems to be

the unsaid message.

From the original article http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10709916/ :

"Cliff Kupchan, an analyst with the Eurasia Group consultancy, said the main lesson from Iraq was that the US as the world's only superpower was still not able to achieve its national interests on its own. "The second lesson is that we can't rely on the Europeans. We can only hope on a 50 per cent recovery of that rift," he commented. "So that leaves us with constructing issue-based coalitions of the willing as the key component of future US foreign policy."

[progressoid]

14. 'coalitions of the willing'

Gimme a fuckin break.

[SmokingJacket]

16. I just can't see how this administration can go on.

It's unsustainable.

Kick!

[upi402]

17. yeah yeah... Did you hear about the missing white chick???

Lets get seriuous!
There's missing babes to report.

[xchrom]

18. ''coalitions of the willing'' get american tax payer pay checks.

[nashville_brook]

19. collective security not needed for despots

[mom cat]

20. The US will find itself more and more isolated.

[greiner3]

21. I thought it took Congressional oversight;

To forge, and I would imagine break, treaties and such. Can he do this? Well, I guess that is the wrong question as he does whatever his little heart wants to do. But seriously, has he flipped?

[fooj]

22. Okay. Now I am REALLY pissed! They must be held accountable!

This is bullshit. They are the Fourth Estate of the U.S. Constitution. Our Founding Fathers made it that way for a REASON! Damn them. They have been entrusted as guardians of the truth. They MUST protect us! The treasonous, rat bastards have abdicated their responsibility to REPORT FACTS! Hell, they've turned their backs on the American People! This cannot continue. By the laws of our Constitution they are obligated to defend and protect the citizens of this country! We must hold the media ACCOUNTABLE for this treasonous behavior!

peace.

[MisterP]

23. and it's five six seven, open up the pearly gates

[Jersey Ginny]

25. Hitler's Hubris has returned. Very scary stuff

First, Hitler rejected the League of Nations (and we had never joined). Next you know he is invading countries and trying to take over Europe while committing horrific atrocities. Can the US be far behind in the 21st century? NATO and the UN provide a forum to talk and debate and negotiate. Far from perfect, since the UN there have been world atrocities, but no world/nuclear wars. I don't think that is a coincidence.

[Miss Chybil]

26. Three years...

Note the quote: